Dismissed

Sanjay Sah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC16 Mar 2020CR. MISC./84606/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court rejected an application for regular bail filed by a petitioner in custody for possession of ganja. The court refused bail due to the significant quantum of drugs recovered and opined the petitioner could reapply after six months.

What did the court decide?

Application for regular bail rejected. Petitioner permitted to renew the prayer for bail after six months if so advised.

Sanjay Sah Vs The State of Bihar — Narcotics (NDPS) | Patna HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84606 of 2019

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2019 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

SANJAY SAH Son of Nayak Sah Resident of Village - Nagari, P.S.Charpokhari and Distt - Bhojpur (Bihar)

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Vinayak For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 16-03-2020

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The instant application for bail has been filed by the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No.136 of 2019, registered for the offence punishable under sections 8, 20(b)(II)(c) and 27 of the N.D.P.S. Act.

¶15

As per allegation in the F.I.R., on a raid being conducted, it is stated that 34.3 kg of ‘Ganja’ was recovered from the house of the petitioner.

¶16

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no recovery as alleged has taken place. Even for the sake of argument if the allegations are taken to be true, partition had taken place in the family much prior to the occurrence, which would be evident from Annexure-3 to the petition.It is not stated

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84606 of 2019(3) dt.16-03-2020 2/2

¶18

by the police as from whose possession the alleged recovery has taken place. It is submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 30.06.2019.

¶19

The application for bail has been opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above as also in view of the recovery of 34.3 kg of Ganja from the house of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and as such the application for regular bail is rejected.

¶21

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, if so advised, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months.

¶22

(Partha Sarthy, J.)

¶23

amit/- U T

Sanjay Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sugriv Yadav @ Sugriv Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Narmadeshwar Singh Vs the State of Bihar

Guddu Yadav @ Shashi Kumar @ Guddu Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Kumar Yadav @ Krishan Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjit Paswan Vs the State of Bihar

Deo Kumar Mahto @ Deo Kumar @ Mia @ Deo Vs The State of Bihar